And what exactly did Stoinis do to warrant a claim that he's a "huge upgrade" over Henriques? Do you remember even one good knock from him in int'l T20s? Cause I don't.
And it's a poor excuse really to say Iyer wouldn't have performed today just because he failed in ODIs. Chahal was carted around in ODIs. But you see....I think you got my point.
Okay where to start. What Stoinis did was his IPL, where I do in fact rate the performances especially if the context is against India. Because it’s an Indian league. But I would rate those performances in any case the same way I rate KL Rahul.
Then you factor in the fact that he’s an Aussie and he’s playing on his home ground. Even if there is further doubt, since the main question is how much Australia lost out, you finally you factor in his replacements in Henriques etc and you realize Stoinis would have added a lot of stability to this lineup. If not replacing Henriques, he could have replaced Abbott easily as both a better bowler and extra gatsman.
Henriques went for 3-22 in his 4
overs .Where exactly was Stoinis missed with the ball?
Not great dismissals to be honest. I think India actually batted better against him than stats show, they just choked against Swepson despite the 6 long hops out of his first 8 balls and had to target someone, then got out targeting Henriques. Henriques bowled okay. That being said, I will steer away from hypotheticals — Stoinis would easily replace Abbott in this Aussie lineup.
And when did I or anyone say it was par or a good batting effort. Mark my words if you want, you have already seen our worst batting performance this series. Point is... inspite of that, we ended up winning. That's surely commendable. No? By the way, most of the overs were bowled by bowlers you didn't mention (Starc, Hazlewood and Zampa) and I'm not even surprised why you....
If that’s the case then perhaps we’re actually on the same side. I also think this will have been India’s worst batting performance in the series, and India should look to easily win 2-1 or 3-0. I’ve actually said this before. And I’ve also given kudos for the win! I’m just pointing out the bad/subpar batting effort against Australia that should have been punished by Aussie batsmen, but wasn’t, which means credit to India (especially Chahal).
Regarding the bowlers I didn’t mention, obviously India batted well against them but Hazlewood is only playing his second T20 in seven years, is he really worth a mention? Or Zampa who bowled some extremely bad balls this innings? I generally don’t rate him, but like I said kudos.
But even assuming these three names are some greats, doesn’t your point just further back up my claim that it should have been 160-170 are dispatching the “good” bowlers but failing to dispatch the “bad” ones? Even the 150 that was indeed reached looked a very distant site until some good recovery by Jadeja which ended up winning India the match.
Oh dear.
So we were just lucky...not like we bowled well or something like that. We were just lucky....
If Australia had somehow chased this and won, they too were just "lucky" that Dhawan, Pandey and Kohli played poor..smh.
Well, India bowled decently. I don’t know how else to put it. Every batsman other than Short looked good, and often Short’s failure to achieve a SR above 95 for 38 consecutive balls caused the others to try and force boundaries - even a boundary or two more by him early on would have conserved Aussie wickets and led to a very easy chase.
I’ll give credit where due, I like the look of Natarajan as he creates a very awkward angle. And everyone else chipped in well too. But I don’t think India bowled as well against Short as the scorecard suggests, he just played an absolutely horrible knock which ended up winning India the match.
If Australia had chased this and won, it would have been expected due to the subpar total. But you are completely right, they were indeed very very lucky. Like I said, they were lucky that Dhawan, Pandey, and Kohli played poor. Otherwise that first over from Swepson alone, not even counting the rest of the innings, should alone have resulted in a 20 run over. Instead he got Kohli’s wicket.
In other words, Australia didn’t play good cricket, and India didn’t either. Barring Jadeja and Chahal. Major difference was that the Aussies were worse (particularly one man). That innings by Short is honestly the worst ever innings by an Aussie opener I have ever seen, and was enough to pull the team down.
Of course questions will be asked. There are half a billion online cricketing pandits sitting in India that will "call for heads" at the flip of a coin. That doesn't mean squat. And no, you being Pakistani has nothing to do with any of this unless ofcourse it's not you but your guilty conscience asking that question
So are you calling those half a billion online cricketing “pandits” dumb?
